by the way, I have seen some criticism of the master post along the lines of, “well some of these are linguistic area maps and it’s right for my tribe so it’s probably all correct even though there’s lots of tribes missing!”
it should go without saying that if there’s tribes missing, it’s wrong, and just because it’s correct for one tribe doesn’t mean it’s a totally correct map. and as I write in the post, “Native territories” is a very broad term and has been interpreted by some as linguistic territories, cultural territories, land ownership….not only do some people assume lands match linguistic territories, but linguistic territories are often used to do “sphere of influence” mapping, a strategy to conflate land with language in the hopes of minimizing land claims. they’re also still perpetuating ignorance and false colonial representations of Native peoples.
thus there is no reason to not include linguistic area maps in the set.
And let’s please not forget the power that these kinds of maps have. Much like changing anthropological accounts and shoddy surveying, these kinds of things, if left unchallenged, shape socio-political policy as it relates to indigenous peoples. I have seen this kind of thing entered into evidence in Court to challenge First Nations’ land claims. We cannot afford to treat this as unimportant.